I post an usual question about the Gunslinger, for the FAQ
So, does RAPID RELOAD and ALCHEMICAL CARTRIDGES stack? (speaking about the reload time improvement)
I.e. Standard reload action becomes free action if you have the feat Rapid Reload and you are using an alchemical cartridge.

page 140 of Ultimate Combat wrote:

[...]Alchemical cartridges make loading a firearm easier, reducing the time to load a firearm by one step (a full-round action becomes a standard action, a standard action becomes a move action, and a move action becomes a free action), [...]

I post an usual question about the Gunslinger, for the FAQ
So, does RAPID RELOAD and ALCHEMICAL CARTRIDGES stack? (speaking about the reload time improvement)
I.e. Standard reload action becomes free action if you have the feat Rapid Reload and you are using an alchemical cartridge.

page 140 of Ultimate Combat wrote:

[...]Alchemical cartridges make loading a firearm easier, reducing the time to load a firearm by one step (a full-round action becomes a standard action, a standard action becomes a move action, and a move action becomes a free action), [...]

It seems both. Take a look at the Lightning Reload deed further in the gunslinger's grit section. The deed specifically mentions how it works when using either Rapid Reload or alchemical cartridges and even goes out of its way to mentioning how having both affects reload times. This infers that you get some benefit out of utilizing both.

Plus common sense seems to support this. Alchemical cartridges reduce the fuss of stuffing all sorts of crap into the barrel of your gun, while Rapid Reload suggests you as a person are just wicked fast at stuffing the little buggers in.

Was the wild rager's uncontrolled rage ability intended to have the same clause at the end of it that the urban barbarian's controlled rage ability had? That this ability alters but otherwise follows the normal rage rules?

I ask because when making a barbarian and adding archetypes, noting that this ability alters rage solidifies that other archetypes that alter rage are ineligible to be combined with it.

Grapple Weapon Quality: On a successful critical hit with a weapon of this type, you can grapple the target of the attack. The wielder can then attempt a combat maneuver check to grapple his opponent as a free action. This grapple attempt does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the creature you are attempting to grapple if that creature is not threatening you. While you grapple the target with a grappling weapon, you can only move or damage the creature on your turn. You are still considered grappled, though you do not have to be adjacent to the creature to continue the grapple. If you move far enough away to be out of the weapon's reach, you end the grapple with that action.

Is the line: "While you grapple the target with a grappling weapon, you can only move or damage the creature on your turn." meant to mean Move/Damage are the only options for Maintaining a Grapple (i.e. you can't Pin using the weapon), or are all the Grappler's actions constrained to this limitation, i.e. even for Swift Actions? Per RAW, it's the latter, as Maintaining a Grapple's auxiliary effects aren't indicated as the context.

"You are still considered grappled, though you do not have to be adjacent to the creature to continue the grapple." doesn't seem to correspond to any restriction in the Core Grapple rules. Those rules state that the opponent is moved adjacent to you on a(ny) successful Grapple check (which still applies to these Weapons, since they don't state otherwise), but there is no requirement to remain adjacent to them (e.g. if the Grappler isn't Grappled them self, and thus isn't subject to the movement limitation).

Although I wish the Core Grapple rules also had a similar line saying that if the target is no longer within reach or threatened by the attack you used for Grapple (whether due to movement per se, Teleportation, becoming Incorporeal and not able to attack Corporeal beings, etc), then the Grapple is ended.

Flurry of Maneuvers for the maneuver master monk archetype possibly needs clarifying text on whether the monk can use the ability in armor or not. Since it replaces flurry of blows, it's not bound by the restrictive text in weapon and armor proficiencies in the base monk. If this ability is intended to be bound by the same restrictions, clarifying text should be applied.

Asking here, possibly for an "official" answer; the Pistol Training from the gunslinger archetype Pisolero does replace or not the basic Gun Training? RAW it's just simply more powerful than the normal class.

Asking here, possibly for an "official" answer; the Pistol Training from the gunslinger archetype Pisolero does replace or not the basic Gun Training? RAW it's just simply more powerful than the normal class.

This was mentioned earlier in the thread so it's likely it'll be answered "officially" come next printing (ie: errata). No word yet from the devs but like many errors similar to this one, common sense tends to suggest that yes, it does replace all 4 cases of gun training.

For any of you out there who may not follow the FAQ updates, here's one from last week:

Prone Shooter was updated to actually do something. Delete the Weapon Focus prerequisite and change the benefit paragraph to say:

"Benefit: If you have been prone since the end of your last turn, the penalty to your Armor Class against melee attacks made against you is reduced to -2. In addition, the bonus to your Armor Class against ranged attacks made against you is increased to +6."

About Metal Cartridges: for the purposes of reload time, they don't modify at all the move action required, right? (In other words, the reference to the alchemical cartridges is purely for description.)

Crowd Control (Ex): At 1st level, an urban barbarian gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC when adjacent to two or more enemies. In addition, her movement is not impeded by crowds, and she gains a bonus equal to 1/2 her barbarian level on Intimidate checks to influence crowds. This ability replaces fast movement.

This 1st level ability of the Urban Barbarian Archetype does not indicate the standard minimum value of 1 for the intimidate vs crowds at level 1.

The first line of the deed implies that you get to choose to spend your grit when you hit, but the third line says you must spend the grit before the attack roll. I believe this needs to be clarified.

Up Close and Deadly:

Up Close and Deadly wrote:

Up Close and Deadly (Ex): At 1st level, when the pistolero hits a target with a one-handed firearm that is not making a scatter shot, she can spend 1 grit point to deal 1d6 points of extra damage on a hit. If she misses with the attack, she grazes the target, dealing half the extra damage anyway. She must choose to spend the grit point before she makes the attack roll. This is precision damage and is not multiplied if the attack is a critical hit. This precision damage increases to 2d6 at 5th level, to 3d6 at 10th level, to 4d6 at 15th level, and to 5d6 at 20th level. This precision damage stacks with sneak attack and other forms of precision damage. This deed replaces the deadeye deed.

Also on the same page under the Mysterious Stranger the Clipping Shot deed lets you do half the damage of an attack that missed for 1 grit, but the last line says; The cost of using this deed cannot be reduced with the Signature Deed feat, the true grit class feature, or any similar effect. I think that Up Close and Deadly should have this line as well. Even though it is only doing half of the precision damage this is still a little to good in my opinion. My apologies if either of these were brought up already I didn't read the whole thread.

In regards to the World Walker, I am aware that people already pointed out the typo with "reduce nature's lore," on the second paragraph of the world walker's description.

However, I would like to know if it was intended for the world walker to gain additional favoured terrains, like a ranger of equal level (so they would get a 2nd favoured terrain at 8th, 13th, and 18th level, with corresponding increase in bonus to a single terrain at each new favoured terrain selection), or do they only gain one favoured terrain, at 3rd level, with their world walker levels stacking with the ranger levels to determine bonus and quantity of favoured terrains (world walker 1/ranger 7 = total of 2 favoured terrains or total of 3 favoured terrains?)?

All other classes that granted favoured terrain were much clearer on this than world walker. Please advise.

In regards to the World Walker, I am aware that people already pointed out the typo with "reduce nature's lore," on the second paragraph of the world walker's description.

However, I would like to know if it was intended for the world walker to gain additional favoured terrains, like a ranger of equal level (so they would get a 2nd favoured terrain at 8th, 13th, and 18th level, with corresponding increase in bonus to a single terrain at each new favoured terrain selection), or do they only gain one favoured terrain, at 3rd level, with their world walker levels stacking with the ranger levels to determine bonus and quantity of favoured terrains (world walker 1/ranger 7 = total of 2 favoured terrains or total of 3 favoured terrains?)?

All other classes that granted favoured terrain were much clearer on this than world walker. Please advise.

Its in the text itself:

World walker:

At 3rd level, the world walker gains the ranger’s favored terrain ability. She treats her druid level as her ranger level for this ability. If she has levels in both classes, both class’s levels stack for determining the effect of this ability.

Its the ability as per ranger which can be more than one favoured terrains granted based on number of druid or ranger levels the character has. Not one favoured terrain, otherwise it would never increase regardless of the number of levels granted. What's the point of being a world walker if you could only walk in one terrain.

In regards to the World Walker, I am aware that people already pointed out the typo with "reduce nature's lore," on the second paragraph of the world walker's description.

However, I would like to know if it was intended for the world walker to gain additional favoured terrains, like a ranger of equal level (so they would get a 2nd favoured terrain at 8th, 13th, and 18th level, with corresponding increase in bonus to a single terrain at each new favoured terrain selection), or do they only gain one favoured terrain, at 3rd level, with their world walker levels stacking with the ranger levels to determine bonus and quantity of favoured terrains (world walker 1/ranger 7 = total of 2 favoured terrains or total of 3 favoured terrains?)?

All other classes that granted favoured terrain were much clearer on this than world walker. Please advise.

CB out.

This is what I meant to do.

Its in the text itself:

World walker:

At 3rd level, the world walker gains the ranger’s favored terrain ability. She treats her druid level as her ranger level for this ability. If she has levels in both classes, both class’s levels stack for determining the effect of this ability.

Its the ability as per ranger which can be more than one favoured terrains granted based on number of druid or ranger levels the character has. Not one favoured terrain, otherwise it would never increase regardless of the number of levels granted. What's the point of being a world walker if you could only walk in one terrain.

DESCRIPTION
You become a larger, awful version of yourself. You grow to size Large, and take on features that horrify your enemies. You gain the following abilities: a +6 size bonus to Strength, a +4 size bonus to Constitution, a +6 natural armor bonus, DR 10/magic, and spell resistance equal to 10 + half your caster level. You also emit an aura that emanates 30 feet from you. Enemy creatures within the aura are shaken. Each time a creature shaken by this aura hits you with a melee attack, that creature becomes frightened for 1d4 rounds, though at the end of that duration it is no longer affected by this aura. The aura’s effect is a fear and mind-affecting effect.

Most spells are standard actions.
The spell over all is not super amazing for a 8th level spell.

DESCRIPTION
You become a larger, awful version of yourself. You grow to size Large, and take on features that horrify your enemies. You gain the following abilities: a +6 size bonus to Strength, a +4 size bonus to Constitution, a +6 natural armor bonus, DR 10/magic, and spell resistance equal to 10 + half your caster level. You also emit an aura that emanates 30 feet from you. Enemy creatures within the aura are shaken. Each time a creature shaken by this aura hits you with a melee attack, that creature becomes frightened for 1d4 rounds, though at the end of that duration it is no longer affected by this aura. The aura’s effect is a fear and mind-affecting effect.

Most spells are standard actions.
The spell over all is not super amazing for a 8th level spell.

Has anyone seen any official postings about this spell?

Nothing official, though the general consensus is that it's a standard action, given that's what every other polymorph spell uses. There are other questions besides the casting time, however, such as what about a creature that casts this spell that's already size Large or larger even? Does your natural reach increase as per typical Large bipeds? Also it doesn't mention if whether or not a creature's equipment melds into its new form, so by default we're to assume the gear grows to match the new size, as per the polymorph spell rules.

In regards to the World Walker, I am aware that people already pointed out the typo with "reduce nature's lore," on the second paragraph of the world walker's description.

However, I would like to know if it was intended for the world walker to gain additional favoured terrains, like a ranger of equal level (so they would get a 2nd favoured terrain at 8th, 13th, and 18th level, with corresponding increase in bonus to a single terrain at each new favoured terrain selection), or do they only gain one favoured terrain, at 3rd level, with their world walker levels stacking with the ranger levels to determine bonus and quantity of favoured terrains (world walker 1/ranger 7 = total of 2 favoured terrains or total of 3 favoured terrains?)?

All other classes that granted favoured terrain were much clearer on this than world walker. Please advise.

CB out.

This is what I meant to do.

Its in the text itself:

World walker:

At 3rd level, the world walker gains the ranger’s favored terrain ability. She treats her druid level as her ranger level for this ability. If she has levels in both classes, both class’s levels stack for determining the effect of this ability.

Its the ability as per ranger which can be more than one favoured terrains granted based on number of druid or ranger levels the character has. Not one favoured terrain, otherwise it would never increase regardless of the number of levels granted. What's the point of being a world walker if you could only walk in one terrain.

If that is the case, then there is almost no reason not to ever take the world walker archetype. It gains a class feature that improves significantly over the course of 20 levels, at the expense of the two weakest druid class abilities. Additionally, the world walker gains the favoured terrain ability at an earlier level than the ranger.

I should have mentioned that I was more interested in knowing whether or not that this was intended by the designer(s)? It is not exactly a game-breaker, but it is a fantastically advantageous option for any druid, without sacrificing (in whole or in part) any of the key druid class features such as spellcasting or wild shape. The trackless step class feature hardly comes into play for players to benefit from (it sees far more use from druid NPCs trying to escape from tracking PCs) and the resist nature's lore has to be one of the most useless class features since it is literally completely dependent on the DM actively adjusting the nature of encounters to feature fey creatures and/or effects that utilize/target plants.

In exchange, the world walker gains 4 favoured terrains, with one of them possibly granting a +8 (unnamed) bonus to initiative checks, knowledge (geography), Perception, Stealth, and Survival skill checks in that terrain. Oh, and he cannot be tracked in all four of his selected terrains (so not really a complete loss of the original trackless step class feature). It is not difficult to see the absurd disparity in game balance for the world walker. The only reason not to take this archetype is if the player was going for any of the other archetypes other than Pack Lord.

Eh, like I said, it's not a game-breaker, but it chafes when I see archetypes that are heads and shoulders above the core class itself.

Page 129: Feels silly to mention this so late in the game, but if the point of Tatami-do armor is to offer "a lighter-weight alternative to o-yoroi" armor, why do they both weigh 45 lbs? Or is the reference to lighter-weight just an allusion to the trade-off of 1 Armor Bonus for 1 Point of Max Dex (which is a bad trade in my books, armor bonus works flat-footed).

Page 129: In a related nitpick, I think the labels for "Lamellar, Steel" and "Lamellar, Iron" may be reversed since it would make sense for iron to be inferior to, and less expensive than steel. This might have been an intentional reversal since, I note, the iron lamellar is 15 lbs heavier than the steel, so if they're not reversed is the implication that they just piled on crude cast iron for heavier (more brittle) protection and that the steel, while more resilient, is lighter and offers less protection? Sorry if this is a "how many angels can fit on a pinhead?" pin-headed question, after awhile trying to explain the numbers is like reading tea leaves.

Once per rage, the barbarian can attempt to sunder an ongoing spell effect by succeeding at a combat maneuver check. For any effect other than one on a creature, the barbarian must make her combat maneuver check against a CMD of 15 plus the effect’s caster level. To sunder an effect on a creature, the barbarian must succeed at a normal sunder combat maneuver against the creature’s CMD + 5, ignoring any miss chance caused by a spell or spell-like ability. If successful, the barbarian suppresses the effect for 1 round, or 2 rounds if she exceeded the CMD by 5 to 9. If she exceeds the CMD by 10 or more, the effect is dispelled.

So for targeting/sundering spells attached to specific creatures,

the basic function of the ability (1 round suppression) works if your CMB equals the CMD+5.
The 2 round suppression works if you exceed the CMD by 5 to 9...
Well, succeeding vs CMD+5 (the basic 1 round effect) is the exact same thing as 'exceed[ing] the CMD by 5 [to 9]'!
So per RAW, you should ALWAYS suppress the spell for 2 rounds, and NEVER do so for only 1 round.

That is for spells attached to characters, for independent spells, the distinction between the basic effective CMD (15+Caster level) which is needed to succeed and exceeding that CMD by 5 remains, yielding potential results of both 1 round and 2 round suppression (and total dispelling).

But the wording of targeting spells on creatures, where the basic success happens on CMD+5, and additional (2 round) success happens when exceeding THE CMD by 5 (not the DC needed for initial success, CMD+5, but CMD per se which is just the CMD itself) means there in never a case where you only suppress for 1 round, any success will mean 2 round suppression for spells attached to characters. If that was the intent, I feel like it would have been presented more forthrightly (with the 1 round effect ONLY associated with the independent spell function), so I'm pretty sure there is an error there, and 1-round suppression IS meant to sometimes apply for spells attached to creatures.

It seems plausible to remove the CMD+5 wording for the base DC for spells attached to characters, which would make it work equivalently to independent spells, and that is not changing the difficulty for 2-round suppression or dispelling. Meanwhile, the wording about bypassing miss chance caused by the spell itself could be moved to also apply to independent spells, e.g. sundering a Fog Cloud spell in an adjacent square. That would possibly leave some space for additional functionality...

-------------------------------------------------------------------

It seems like there should be a line stating that the highest of (15+CasterLevel) and (target CMD+5) should be used. That covers high level casters casting powerful spells on low CMD commoners (in a more realistic way, where the commoner's weakness doesn't make the spell easier to dispel), and also is amenable to using Spell Sunder to dispel unwanted spells from allies (if the ally's willingness means that their CMD is removed as a factor, leaving the alternate 15+CasterLevel to overcome). There are other situations regarding 'willing targets' of attacks/CMBs, which are not covered by RAW, but since this ability already has an alternate DC (which should logically apply if that DC is higher than the target's own CMD+5), there is an easy solution to enable that functionality.

The spell Pup Shape has a listed target of "one animal or magical beast," but in the description it only mentions "You transform the subject animal into a Small magical beast," So does it affect animals or animals and magical beasts?

Was the aklys meant to deal 1d6(S)/1d8(M) damage? A few things point to it being too high:

1) It's Adventurer's Armory version has identical stats (save the performance property) except it deals 1d4(S)/1d6(M)
2) It's a light weapon, and no light weapon in any book deals that much damage.
3) It says it's like a throwing club, and even the club, which is a one-handed weapon, meaning it's bigger, only deals 1d4(S)/1d6(M)

Was going through some of my friend's Campaign Setting books and saw that the aklys listed in Classic Horrors Revisited also deals 1d4(S) / 1d6(M)

If the dragonhide used to construct this armor comes from a dragon that had immunity to an energy type, the armor pieces also have immunity to that energy type, but only confer the immunity on the wearer if he is wearing a suit of armor made entirely of dragonhide from the same type of dragon.

...COMPARED TO THE CRB:

Quote:

Dragonhide: Armorsmiths can work with the hides of dragons to produce armor or shields of masterwork quality. (...) If the dragonhide comes from a dragon that had immunity to an energy type, the armor is also immune to that energy type, although this does not confer any protection to the wearer. If the armor or shield is later given the ability to protect the wearer against that energy type, the cost to add such protection is reduced by 25%.

The bolded parts seem in direct contradiction. The relevant passage in Ult Combat is stated to apply to "a suit of armor made entirely of dragonhide", which includes standard non-piecemeal armor as well (a normal suit of armor not purchased piece-meal is in fact composed of pieces per the piecemeal rules, as it's pieces can be replaced with other types of armor, the remaining pieces of the suit of course being "pieces"), so on a rules as well as commmon-sense basis I don't see how these rules aren't discussing exactly the same thing but in a conflicting manner.

Also, I'm confused about the Piecemeal rules re: Special Materials and the specific example of Dragonhide.
The general rules states:

Quote:

In order for the armor to gain the benefits of a special material, all armor pieces worn must be made of the same special material. Because of this, armor pieces constructed of special materials can be constructed at a decreased cost based on which pieces are made of the special material. Constructing a whole suit of armor with the same special materials uses the standard costs.

But then in Dragonhide it states:

Quote:

A piece of dragonhide armor costs double the armor piece cost + 100 gp. Alternatively, a plate torso armor piece can be constructed from dragonhide for 700 gp, and an agile plate torso armor piece can be constructed from dragonhide for 1,100 gp; if either is worn alone, it bestows any energy damage immunity possessed by the dragon to the wearer.

Which contradicts the general rule, since the piece IS granting it's special benefit. I realized that this rule makes some sense because a plate torso piece is a breastplate when worn alone, so its technically a full suit... But I think that deserves Errata/FAQ on it's own, because besides just this special material, that logic would also apply to how masterwork enchantments apply... "Pieces which count as (lesser) full armor suits" should be directly stated as an exception to the rule on how pieces function (re: MW/material/magic), or rather, that said rules don't apply to "pieces that count as full armor suit". (still strange that if you add another non-magical armor piece, the special material benefits cease functioning since you're no longer wearing the piece alone)

As far as one and two-handed firearm ammunition is concerned, if a character can potentially craft a firearm untrained, I can't imagine they're required to take a feat to craft bullets (balls of lead).

The feat Gunsmithing allows you to craft firearms without the use of the craft skill. Craft (firearm) allows you to craft a one-handed or two-handed firearm at DC 20.

It'd be easy to mistake that table as only applying to the use of the field repair feat, but that feat states "you can make a Craft check with the DC it takes to craft that item (see Table 2–2, below)." Since Ultimate Combat didn't have a skills chapter, they decided to place the "New Item Craft DCs" table under a relevant feat. I imagine it was mistakenly omitted due to field repair having no benefit for ammunition.

I could have sworn that you could only craft them without the feat at higher Availability levels...

You're probably thinking of this line, on Emerging Guns:

PRD/Ultimate Combat wrote:

Adventurers who want to use guns must take the Craft Firearms feat just to make them feasible weapons.

This is the only mention of the "Craft Firearms feat" anywhere in this book or the PRD that I can find. Obviously guns can be made into feasible weapons without the non-existent feat. My guess is that the line is a left-over from the process of deciding how they wanted to handle firearm crafting and repair for gunslingers, which resulted in gunsmithing. But nothing prohibits using craft(firearms) to craft guns. The only thing that's missing are the skills and DCs for ammunition.

I appreciate the suggested DCs, but it's still something that needs errata. I don't mean to derail the thread, so if there's any disagreement on this, we can start a thread in the Rules Questions forum (though I have fewer questions than assertions. :)

Ultimate Combat finally has its second printing, along with a host of corrections in its first-to-second-printing errata document. Below is (hopefully) a full list of the issues from this thread we thought needed addressing that maybe fell through the cracks when the new printing was being updated (I say maybe, because we could be wrong and they don't need any fixing). I'll try to avoid posting simple typos, unless the typo is one that could lead to confusion with the rules. I know that Paizo may have corrected many of these typos in the new printing, but oftentimes don't mention the obvious ones in errata.

Persisting UC errors:

Pg. 8 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] The samurai inexplicably gets lesser starting wealth than the other martial classes, especially the cavalier from which this class is an alternate class for.

Pg. 16 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Assassinate master trick, it's worth noting that this ability is better in all ways to the death attack ability of the Assassin prestige class. Also, it's possible this ability should have been labeled as a death effect, which it hasn't been. If it were supposed to be, it wouldn't work on elementals, undead, or anything immune to death effects.

Pg. 19 [RULE CLARIFICATION] Samurai, weapon expertise ability, fifth sentence says a samurai's levels stack with any fighter levels he has for the purposes of meeting the prerequisites for feats that specifically select his chosen weapon. It doesn't say anything about a samurai with no levels in fighter still being able to do this, however. It's unclear if a samurai needs 1 level of fighter in order to "unlock" this part of the ability.

Pg. 24 Siege Bomb discovery, fourth sentence says this bomb does fire damage or another energy type if the alchemist is capable of modifying his bombs in that way. Unless there's another alchemist ability that does this outside of the various bomb-altering discoveries, these abilities couldn't be combined because all of those discoveries as well as this one have that little asterisk next to their names.

Pg. 30 [FAQ UPDATE] FAQ updated the Jotungrip ability, first sentence, change "two-handed weapon" to "two-handed melee weapon", but didn't make it into the errata document.

Pg. 31 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] True primitive archetype, trophy fetish ability, fifth sentence says a trophy fetish can also be attached to a suit a hide armor. It's possible this was also meant to include the bone armors mentioned in their weapon and armor proficiencies.

Pg. 31 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Urban barbarian archetype, crowd control ability, second sentence says the barbarian gains a bonus equal to 1/2 her barbarian level on Intimidate checks to influence crowds. Because it doesn't say (minimum +1), the barbarian wouldn't see a bonus to this until she's level 2. This might not be an error, because she still gains the +1 to attack and AC when adjacent to two or more enemies.

Pg. 32 Daredevil archetype, scoundrel's fortune ability, second sentence says this ability can be used eight times per day at 20th level, but the math doesn't add up. It should be a max of six times per day at 20th.

Pg. 38 Musketeer archetype, gifted firearm ability, 3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence mentions the minimum this ability can reduce the misfire chance of a weapon is 1, which it claims is similar to the reliable firearm weapon property. This is untrue, as reliable can reduce a misfire chance to a minimum of 0.

Pg. 40 Crusader archetype, bonus feats, first sentence says at 20th level they should have a maximum of six bonus feats, but by the math it should only be five.

Pg. 42 & 43 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Ape, bat, and boar shamans. The original designer of the animal shamans from Advanced Player's Guide said he intended for Totemic Transformations to replace woodland stride. Whether this detail was cut or forgotten is unknown, but totemic transformations seems too good to get for free. If it is in error, that means those animal shamans in APG, UC, and UM are all wrong.

Pg. 42 Bat shaman archetype, totemic transformation, second paragraph, "mammals only" is incredibly broad and doesn't fit the norm for every other animal shaman. Given this is a bat shaman, fitting the norm would be instead something like "bats and related animals only."

Pg. 44 Armor master archetype, deflective shield ability, second sentence says the bonus this ability grants reaches a maximum of +6 at 20th level, but the math doesn't add up. It'd be a +5 at 18th level, and then +6 at 22nd level if there were epic level rules.

Pg. 56 [RULES CLARIFICATION] Myrmidarch archetype, ranged spellstrike ability, the example ranged weapon used for describing the role of this archetype is the bow, a two-handed ranged weapon. Using ranged spellstrike with a bow, it's hard to determine how this works since the Spell Combat ability of the magus requires one hand free for casting while the other hand wields a light or one-handed weapon. This ability, based on its description, seems like it would need to work the same way.

Pg. 58 Maneuver master archetype, flurry of maneuvers ability, a maneuver master was probably meant to lose this ability while wearing armor, wielding a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, like a standard monk does with flurry of blows, but it doesn't say so.

Pg. 60 Sensei archetype, mystic wisdom ability, second paragraph, last sentence says this ability replaces the bonus feats a monk normally gets at 6th, 12th, and 18th level. Unfortunately, a monk doesn't get a bonus feat at 12th level, but he does get one at 10th level and again at 14th level.

Pg. 70 - [RULE CLARIFICATION] Underhanded rogue talent; even with the Quickdraw feat, drawing a concealed weapon is a move action, and thus couldn't be performed in a surprise round along with an attack.

Pg. 70 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Advanced Rogue Talents; the ninja gets a master ninja trick called "advanced talents" which lets a ninja choose an advanced rogue talent. It seems like an obvious omission that there's not a rogue talent equivalent. If there was supposed to be one, it'd would've probably looked something like this:
* Master Tricks: The rogue can select a ninja trick from the list of Master Tricks in place of a rogue talent. The rogue cannot select a ninja trick that has the same name as a rogue talent. The rogue can choose but cannot use tricks that require ki points, unless she has a ki pool.

Pg. 70 Hard minded rogue talent; this talent is nearly identical to another advanced rogue talent from the Core Rulebook called Slippery Mind, except that it is better on all accounts, letting you make a save more than once, letting you make a save on all mind-affecting effects (not just enchantment spells and effects), and allowing you to save on effects that don't normally even allow for a saving throw.

Pg. 97 Djinni Style feat, benefit paragraph; maybe rewrite the second sentence to not say that when you're in this style, you MUST use Elemental Fist to deal electricity damage.

Pg. 101 Final Embrace feat, benefit paragraph (last sentence) and normal paragraph; these snippets no longer make sense. As of Bestiary 2, any creature with the grab special ability can grab creatures of its size or smaller.

Pg. 110 Moonlight Stalker Feint feat and Moonlight Stalker Master feat; prerequisites for each feat; Improved Feint appears to be in the wrong feat's prerequisites. Right now it's in Moonlight Stalker Master, which has nothing to do with feinting, whereas Moonlight Stalker Feint obviously does. Also, Improved Feint seems like a natural prerequisite for what Moonlight Stalker Feint does.

Pg. 113 [FAQ UPDATE] Prone Shooter feat; the errata fixed the benefits paragraph of this feat, but it didn't include the other corrections suggested by the FAQ originally. In the prerequisites paragraph, delete "Weapon Focus (crossbow or firearm)". Also, delete the entire Special paragraph.

Pg. 128 Lamellar armor description should have a sentence at the end that says it comes with gauntlets, as described in the piecemeal armor rules for this armor described further in the book.

Pg. 128 O-Yoroi armor description should have a sentence at the end that says it comes with gauntlets, as described in the piecemeal armor rules for this armor described further in the book.

Pg. 129 Table 3-1: Eastern Armor, medium armor, do-maru and kikko armors may have incorrect prices, as kikko armor is superior in all ways to do-maru armor, and costs 15% the cost of do-maru armor. While we're on the subject...

Pg. 129 [SUPPLEMENT UPDATE] Perhaps the stone coat should have had its name changed to match it's new title in Ultimate Equipment, stone lamellar. You'd also need to change its name in the table on the same page.

Pg. 129 Tatami-do armor description should have a sentence at the end that says it comes with gauntlets, as described in the piecemeal armor rules for this armor described further in the book.

Pg. 130 [RULE CLARIFICATION] Dan bong weapon; these weapons grant a wielder a +2 bonus on CMB checks to grapple. According to the rules for grappling, however, a character takes a -4 penalty to their CMB checks to grapple if they don't have both hands free. It's uncertain if this weapon reduces the penalty to -2, or ignores the penalty and grants a +2. {WRITER'S SUGGESTION: Perhaps a good fix to this would be adding a sentence in the description of the grapple weapon quality that says these weapons allow their wielders to ignore the -4 penalty for not having both hands free?}

Pg. 132 Table 3-3: Eastern Weapons - Exotic, two-handed melee weapons, kyoketsu shoge, type column; the table only lists slashing and piercing, which only covers the held blade end. The blunt ring on the other end deals bludgeoning damage, which the weapon description on the same page says, too.

Pg. 132 [RULES CLARIFICATION] Double walking stick katana; this weapon requires a little more explanation. It's clear that the stats provided in the table on the same page are for the weapon when it's "sheathed" and it's just one, quarterstaff-like weapon. When separated into its blades, however, the description should probably just say "treat these like wakizashi" instead of only hinting at it. If this is what was intended, then does a player need Exotic Weapon Proficiency (wakizashi) to use them?
If this WASN'T the case, though, then this weapon's stats in the table may need tweaking, as now it says the only damage type is bludgeoning and it doesn't list a wakizashi's crit range. Also, it's unclear if they then are treated as light weapons when separated.

Pg. 132 Kusarigama; because this weapon's a double weapon and each end does different damage values as well as different damage types, it actually matters knowing which end deals which damage. The description should point out that the sickle end deals the higher damage value and the chain deals the lower damage value.

Pg. 132 [RULES CLARIFICATION] Kyoketsu Shoge; this weapon can be thrown and has a 20-ft. range increment. What's bizarre is that it has a 10-ft. rope that separates the two weapons. Which end is intended to be thrown? Is it intended to be thrown with the rope and heavy object tied to the other end trailing behind it?

Pg. 137 Double hackbut; this weapon doesn't mention what it uses for ammunition.

Pg. 138 Table 3-4: Early Firearms, one-handed firearms, dragon pistol, range column; the table says the range increment for this weapon is 20 feet, however the description of this weapon on page 139 says something different; its range increment is a 15-ft. cone when firing pellets and 10-ft. when firing bullets.

Pg. 139 Dragon pistol; as mentioned above, the description of this weapon has a different range compared to the weapon's stats in the table on page 138.

Pg. 143 [RULES CLARIFICATION] Far-reaching sight and see invisibility sight; Perhaps there should be something mentioned about firearms only being able to have one magical sight attached at a time? Assuming that's true? Also...

Pg. 143 [SUPPLEMENT UPDATE] See invisibility sight; maybe this item should have its name changed to match its new name in Ultimate Equipment - the seeker's sight.

Pg. 144 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR, RULES CLARIFICATION] Scorpion whip; there are a couple of unusual things about this weapon. First, it's classified as a light weapon, when a normal whip is a one-handed weapon, not to mention this weapon appeared in two other books as a one-handed weapon (Adventurer's Armory and Legacy of Fire Player's Guide). Second, as a whip this weapon should have the trip, disarm, and reach special properties. It doesn't say this in the table, but the description says to treat a scorpion whip like a whip if you have proficiency with a whip, which would include those properties.

Pg. 145 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Aklys; a handful of things point to this weapon having incorrect damage values. First, NO light weapon has damage values this high. Second, this weapon appeared in both Adventurer's Armory and Classic Horrors Revisited and in both of those books it only dealt 1d4 (Small) and 1d6 (Medium). Third, this weapon is described as a sort of throwing club. A club is a one-handed weapon, meaning it's bigger, and still only does 1d4 (Small) and 1d6 (Medium).

Pg. 147 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Gold armor; nothing is mentioned about gold armor having the fragile armor quality, but gold weapons do.

Pg. 147 Stone weapons, first paragraph says stone can be used to make light and one-handed bludgeoning weapons, spears, and arrowheads. The description of stone above, however, mentions weapons that don't fall into these categories, namely axes and knives (daggers).

Pg. 158 Siege Engine Rules, crew section, second paragraph, last sentence mixes up Colossal and Gargantuan sizes. Change it to read as follows:
* "If Large or larger creatures serve as crew members, each Large creature counts as four crew members, a Huge creature counts as eight Medium creatures, a Gargantuan creature counts as 16 Medium creatures, and a Colossal creature counts as 20 Medium creatures."

Pg. 159 Ranged Siege Engines, direct-fire ranged siege engines section, second paragraph, last sentence mentions a targeting platform and then says to "see below" for presumably its description. No such thing exists in the book.

Pg. 163 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Firewyrm; should there be something about those who fail their Reflex saves catching on fire?

Pg. 163 Springal; none of the various types of springals say what their targeting DCs are.

Pg. 164 Smoke Shot; doesn't specify which siege engine uses it. The use of the word "shot" in its name implies it's used by cannons and fiend's mouth cannons.

Pg. 167 Table 3-18: Buildings; in the headers at the top of this table, the words "Colossal" and "Gargantuan" are swapped.

Pg. 167 Table 3-20: Gates; in the headers at the top of this table, the words "Colossal" and "Gargantuan" are swapped.

Pg. 198 Piecemeal armor rules; further in this section, O-yoroi armor when put together grants a +9 armor bonus when normally it's a +8 armor bonus.

Pg. 199 Piecemeal armor, dragonhide; the rules here say dragonhide armor only confers energy immunity to the wearer if the wearer has a complete armor set and all pieces are from the same type of dragon. This contradicts the Core Rulebook, which says dragonhide never grants energy immunity to the wearer, but makes future magical enchantments that grant this immunity cheaper to apply.

Pg. 222Abundant ammunition spell; this spell is missing its ranged line. It should be "Range touch"

Pg. 224 [TYPO] Brow gasher spell; change the school from "necromancer" to "necromancy".

Pg. 230 [POSSIBLY NOT AN ERROR] Find quarry spell; unlike other similar spells, such as nondetection and mind blank, this spell doesn't mention if anything, whether it be mundane or magical in nature, blocks its effects.

Pg. 232 [RULE CLARIFICATION] Judgement light spell; this spell is missing its spell resistance and saving throw lines. The destruction aspect of this spell mentions a Will save, but the Justice and Piercing aspects affect enemies and make no mention of such a save being allowed.
As far as spell resistance is concerned, one could make the argument that since this spell enhances the judgement ability of the inquisitor, which is a supernatural ability, it is not subject to spell resistance.

Pg. 245Symbol of striking spell; every symbol spell has rules for making it permanent with the permanency spell. This spell mentions working like symbol of death which would include its rules about being able to be made permanent, but the cost and minimal CL needed would definitely be different.

**BONUS**
Ultimate Combat doesn't have any of the new spell descriptors introduced in Ultimate Magic, possibly because their release dates were so close together and therefore were being worked on at the same time? Who knows. Anyway, here's this writer's opinion of which spells in this book would best qualify for these new descriptors:

The Order of the Warrior has the ability way of the samurai. It's use costs one use of the samurai's resolve ability. The first sentence under Samurai Orders states that the orders can be chosen by cavaliers as well. Cavaliers do not have the resolve ability, they instead have the tactician ability.

Should a Cavalier be able to take the Order of the Warrior? If so, should they be allowed the Way of the Samurai ability? If so, should it cost one use of their Tactician ability?

The Order of the Warrior has the ability way of the samurai. It's use costs one use of the samurai's resolve ability. The first sentence under Samurai Orders states that the orders can be chosen by cavaliers as well. Cavaliers do not have the resolve ability, they instead have the tactician ability.

Should a Cavalier be able to take the Order of the Warrior? If so, should they be allowed the Way of the Samurai ability? If so, should it cost one use of their Tactician ability?

Good catch. I'm house ruling it that way until something official is mentioned. It's true that cavaliers wouldn't get as many uses of this ability, since by 8th level they should only have 2 uses of tactician, and samurai will have double that in resolve. This seems ok to me, as this order was designed with samurai in mind, and so cavaliers shouldn't be as effective with it. Sort of how clerics are free to choose an inquisition instead of a domain, but it behooves them not to.

The "tear flesh" reference in Boar Ferocity and Boar Shred feats is flavor text for dealing bleed damage using Boar Style. The intimidate check in Boar Shred doesn't require a hit, it is a separate action.

In the absense of errata or an FAQ entry, I am house ruling that Boar Style gives 2d6 bleed damage and Boar Shred increases this to 3d6. Eliminating the bleed damage from Boar Style and changing Boar Shred to 1d6 would also make sense, but it changes the meaning of tear flesh to just "hit twice in the same round with an unarmed strike."

The "tear flesh" reference in Boar Ferocity and Boar Shred feats is flavor text for dealing bleed damage using Boar Style. The intimidate check in Boar Shred doesn't require a hit, it is a separate action.

In the absense of errata or an FAQ entry, I am house ruling that Boar Style gives 2d6 bleed damage and Boar Shred increases this to 3d6. Eliminating the bleed damage from Boar Style and changing Boar Shred to 1d6 would also make sense, but it changes the meaning of tear flesh to just "hit twice in the same round with an unarmed strike."

I just spent some time trudging through the boards looking at similar threads about this issue. 3d6, to me, seems like a ton of bleed damage (or at least makes this feat chain too much of a "must have" for damage-starved monks). Because of the last sentence of Boar Style, where it says "When you do, you deal 2d6 bleed damage with the attack", I'm going to interpret that bolded part as meaning it happens immediately, which is different from normal bleed damage that waits until the creature's turn. Therefore, I'm going to house rule that the 2d6 is more like rend damage, however I'm going to make a note that creatures that are normally immune to bleed effects are immune to this extra damage, as well.

I just spent some time trudging through the boards looking at similar threads about this issue. 3d6, to me, seems like a ton of bleed damage (or at least makes this feat chain too much of a "must have" for damage-starved monks). Because of the last sentence of Boar Style, where it says "When you do, you deal 2d6 bleed damage with the attack", I'm going to interpret that bolded part as meaning it happens immediately, which is different from normal bleed damage that waits until the creature's turn. Therefore, I'm going to house rule that the 2d6 is more like rend damage, however I'm going to make a note that creatures that are normally immune to bleed effects are immune to this extra damage, as well.

Your interpretation does seem more balanced. I wish we had something more on what the designer's intended here.

A suggested Errata for the Titan Mauler archetype (for the Barbarian class):

Massive Weapons (Ex) At 3rd level, the titan mauler is able to wield a weapon even if the size difference would increase it one or more "steps" beyond "two-handed." Furthermore, the attack roll penalty for using weapons too large for her size is reduced by 1, and this reduction increases by 1 for every three levels beyond 3rd (to a minimum of 0). This ability replaces trap sense.

Note this is from the Rogue archetype page, not the Ninja class. Rogues can choose Ninja Trick instead of a Rogue Talent.

PRD wrote:

Ninja Trick (Ex): A rogue with this talent can choose a trick from the ninja trick list. The rogue can choose but cannot use talents that require ki points, unless she has a ki pool. A rogue can pick this talent more than once. The ninja cannot choose a ninja trick with the same name as a rogue talent.

(Emphasis mine.)

I suspect that "ninja" (in bold, above) should actually read "rogue" since, A: we are talking about rogues in this section, not ninjas, and B: if ninjas were prevented from taking a trick with the same name as a rogue talent, they could never get access to things like Combat Trick, and C: you wouldn't want to have to look for rules about ninjas in the Rogue section of the book.